OOPS
-
National Flood Insurance Expired Sunday, Right Before Epic Rainfall
The Hartford Courant 11:44 a.m. EDT, March 31, 2010
Rivers are overflowing, basements are filling up with water and the National Flood Insurance Program expired Sunday.
Standard homeowner's insurance policies do not cover flooding that pours into a house from the outside. In order to get coverage, some property owners buy into the federal government's National Flood Insurance Program. But the program was up for renewal, which the U.S. Senate did not do before its Easter break.
That means mortgages that require the homeowner to have flood insurance are on hold, and those who need to renew their policies aren't able to do so. It won't effect those who currently have insurance through the program and need to file a claim after this week's rain.
"Payments for claims on existing policies will not be impacted; such policies will continue uninterrupted," said Brad Carroll, press secretary for the Federal Emergency Management Agency which oversees the program.
The U.S. Senate could vote to continue the program when they reconvene starting April 12.
Copyright
2010, The Hartford Courant -
Oops? LOL
That is really despicable,.... and a tragedy for those who lost all their belongings.
always better to live on higher ground.
-
This should be a fun test. Yes, flood insurance wasn't renewed. And guess who blocked it from being renewed? Republicans.
Flood insurance was part of the same bill that featured unemployment insurance. That bill was being blocked by Jim Bunning, a Republican, and is now being blocked by Tom Coburn, also a Republican. Democrats were unanimous in their desire to pass the extension.
So John suggested that maybe this was caused by Democrats celebrating the health care victory, and that they simply forgot to do this. Obviously not true. Then Cal chimed in that this was "really despicable" and a "tragedy" and laughed at the Democrats.
"Oops" is right.
So is it still "despicable" now that you know the Republicans blocked this extension, while every single Democrat wanted to pass it?
I won't hold my breath waiting for a correction.
-
Jeez, Heck, is it your time of the month.
I posted this days ago and you can see for yourself, the dearth of responses. Like a feather falling in the middle of the forest.
Have a nice Easter.
PS Why should anybody ask that an expense be paid for - even from yet-to-be spent 'stimulous' funds? THAT would be irrecponsible
-
Like I said, it would be a fun test. Predictable, but fun.
When it turns out the Republicans put a hold on this bill (something T clearly doesn't understand, but what does he?) and that it's Republican Senators who have allowed flood insurance to lapse right at the time when many are going to need it, not one of you says, "Oh, my bad."
Instead, we get "this is an old thread" and T's inability to understand the basic rules of our democracy.
It's a wonderfully honest board.
-
Like I said, it would be a fun test. Predictable, but fun.
When it turns out the Republicans put a hold on this bill (something T clearly doesn't understand, but what does he?) and that it's Republican Senators who have allowed flood insurance to lapse right at the time when many are going to need it, not one of you says, "Oh, my bad."
Instead, we get "this is an old thread" and T's inability to understand the basic rules of our democracy.
It's a wonderfully honest board.
Like I said, it would be a fun test. Predictable, but fun.
When it turns out the Republicans put a hold on this bill (something T clearly doesn't understand, but what does he?) and that it's Republican Senators who have allowed flood insurance to lapse right at the time when many are going to need it, not one of you says, "Oh, my bad."
Instead, we get "this is an old thread" and T's inability to understand the basic rules of our democracy.
It's a wonderfully honest board.
What was the Browns' record last year, Heck? Was it, Team 5-11? Defense 9-7? Offense 1-15?
You, my friend, are more predictable than the sun coming up every morning.
-
Like I said, it would be a fun test. Predictable, but fun.
When it turns out the Republicans put a hold on this bill (something T clearly doesn't understand, but what does he?) and that it's Republican Senators who have allowed flood insurance to lapse right at the time when many are going to need it, not one of you says, "Oh, my bad."
Instead, we get "this is an old thread" and T's inability to understand the basic rules of our democracy.
It's a wonderfully honest board.
What was the Browns' record last year, Heck? Was it, Team 5-11? Defense 9-7? Offense 1-15?
You, my friend, are more predictable than the sun coming up every morning.
What was the Browns' record last year, Heck? Was it, Team 5-11? Defense 9-7? Offense 1-15?
You, my friend, are more predictable than the sun coming up every morning.
Looking at this thread, he called you out on your criticism of him with a valid point, and you respond with this, completely ignoring what he brought up because you posted it a few days ago, and then this. Then, cal and T thank you for it!
This place is such a circle jerk.
-
John, I'm sure somewhere in your responses about how this thread is a few days old, and "what was the Browns record last year", and how I must be having my period - you know, like bitches do! Yeah! - there's a brilliant retort to my points. But I can't see it. Maybe it's me.
-
What was the Browns' record last year, Heck? Was it, Team 5-11? Defense 9-7? Offense 1-15?
You, my friend, are more predictable than the sun coming up every morning.
Looking at this thread, he called you out on your criticism of him with a valid point, and you respond with this, completely ignoring what he brought up because you posted it a few days ago, and then this. Then, cal and T thank you for it!
This place is such a circle jerk.
Looking at this thread, he called you out on your criticism of him with a valid point, and you respond with this, completely ignoring what he brought up because you posted it a few days ago, and then this. Then, cal and T thank you for it!
This place is such a circle jerk.
Heck is a HACK.
-
See just how wrong you were, Vapor?
-
Haven't followed it.
So the dem majority isn't quite large enough as yet?
WSS
-
No, it's not. You've got 58, Scott Brown, and Joe Lieberman. But that's not really the point if you understand how holds work in the Senate.
You can't vote on a bill if you don't have a motion to proceed, which requires unanimous consent. If someone wants to put a hold on a bill, all they have to do is object to the motion to proceed. So that's what Bunning did. And then Coburn did it too. That's what a "hold" is. So no vote before the Easter recess, because it can take days to overcome a hold even if you do have the 60 votes, which the Democrats don't, at least not on their own.
So this is how we know the Republicans blocked the extension of flood insurance. Maybe Coburn would have thought twice about it if he'd known half of New England would be under water.
But don't let me stop you guys from blaming it on Democrats. Against all evidence to the contrary. Even when corrected. Even when you're obviously wrong.
You know, like a shithead would.
-
No, it's not. You've got 58, Scott Brown, and Joe Lieberman. But that's not really the point if you understand how holds work in the Senate.
You can't vote on a bill if you don't have a motion to proceed, which requires unanimous consent. If someone wants to put a hold on a bill, all they have to do is object to the motion to proceed. So that's what Bunning did. And then Coburn did it too. That's what a "hold" is. So no vote before the Easter recess, because it can take days to overcome a hold even if you do have the 60 votes, which the Democrats don't, at least not on their own.
So this is how we know the Republicans blocked the extension of flood insurance. Maybe Coburn would have thought twice about it if he'd known half of New England would be under water.
But don't let me stop you guys from blaming it on Democrats. Against all evidence to the contrary. Even when corrected. Even when you're obviously wrong.
You know, like a shithead would.
No, it's not. You've got 58, Scott Brown, and Joe Lieberman. But that's not really the point if you understand how holds work in the Senate.
You can't vote on a bill if you don't have a motion to proceed, which requires unanimous consent. If someone wants to put a hold on a bill, all they have to do is object to the motion to proceed. So that's what Bunning did. And then Coburn did it too. That's what a "hold" is. So no vote before the Easter recess, because it can take days to overcome a hold even if you do have the 60 votes, which the Democrats don't, at least not on their own.
So this is how we know the Republicans blocked the extension of flood insurance. Maybe Coburn would have thought twice about it if he'd known half of New England would be under water.
But don't let me stop you guys from blaming it on Democrats. Against all evidence to the contrary. Even when corrected. Even when you're obviously wrong.
You know, like a shithead would.
Me??
Hey I didn't hear we were back to needing a 60 vote majority again.
Anyway I'm surprised Obama didn't stop the flood.
Hey maybe it wasn't "paid for."
WSS
-
No, not you. I'm talking to the people who had it exactly backwards, but are content living in the place where they have it exactly backwards. And then accusing the guy who has it right of being a hack. Also, up is down.
As for you, I've always enjoyed it when you (and many others) make up a false premise - "You think Obama is the messiah!" - and then make jokes based on the premise you made up.
Which, again, is why conservative comedy never works. No one understands/agrees with your premise.
-
No, not you. I'm talking to the people who had it exactly backwards, but are content living in the place where they have it exactly backwards. And then accusing the guy who has it right of being a hack. Also, up is down.
As for you, I've always enjoyed it when you (and many others) make up a false premise - "You think Obama is the messiah!" - and then make jokes based on the premise you made up.
Which, again, is why conservative comedy never works. No one understands/agrees with your premise.
No, not you. I'm talking to the people who had it exactly backwards, but are content living in the place where they have it backwards.
As for you, I've always enjoyed it when you (and many others) make up a false premise - "You think Obama is the messiah!" - and then make jokes based on the premise you made up.
Which, again, is why conservative comedy never works. No one understands/agrees with your premise.
Yeah conservative humor is kind of sparse. But the half hour laff riot lends itself better to the college crowd. "Dude did you see Stewart? I nearly spewed!!" school of thought.
Then again you gotta admit the ooh aah over Obama is way more widespresad than "Newt Gingrich Mmm mmm mmm."
WSS
-
No, not you. I'm talking to the people who had it exactly backwards, but are content living in the place where they have it backwards.
As for you, I've always enjoyed it when you (and many others) make up a false premise - "You think Obama is the messiah!" - and then make jokes based on the premise you made up.
Which, again, is why conservative comedy never works. No one understands/agrees with your premise.
Yeah conservative humor is kind of sparse. But the half hour laff riot lends itself better to the college crowd. "Dude did you see Stewart? I nearly spewed!!" school of thought.
Then again you gotta admit the ooh aah over Obama is way more widespresad than "Newt Gingrich Mmm mmm mmm."
WSS
Yeah conservative humor is kind of sparse. But the half hour laff riot lends itself better to the college crowd. "Dude did you see Stewart? I nearly spewed!!" school of thought.
Then again you gotta admit the ooh aah over Obama is way more widespresad than "Newt Gingrich Mmm mmm mmm."
WSS
Yuck.
-
Well, more than Newt Gingrich, sure. Nobody loves Newt Gingrich. That's like saying your favorite food is bark. But the idea that there are lots of liberals out there who worship Obama and would follow everything he says is a conservative creation. There really aren't. It's just something you guys tell yourselves, and you all agree, because you all tell yourselves.
Which is why when you bring it up in mixed company the rest of us say, "Huh? We do?" Which is why it doesn't work as the premise of a joke. Except in the fever swamp.
And it's even more ridiculous when you consider that it's coming from a party that can't get through a speech, conference, or a debate without some overwrought paean to Ronald Reagan, Greatest American Hero Ever.
But yes, Steve, after eight years of the Bush administration many Americans were downright delighted to find an articulate and charismatic leader who shared their ideas about the direction in which the country should move. A sizable majority of them, in fact.
-
Well, more than Newt Gingrich, sure. Nobody loves Newt Gingrich. That's like saying your favorite food is bark. But the idea that there are lots of liberals out there who worship Obama and would follow everything he says is a conservative creation. There really aren't. It's just something you guys tell yourselves, and you all agree, because you all tell yourselves.
Which is why when you bring it up in mixed company the rest of us say, "Huh? We do?" Which is why it doesn't work as the premise of a joke. Except in the fever swamp.
And it's even more ridiculous when you consider that it's coming from a party that can't get through a speech, conference, or a debate without some overwrought paean to Ronald Reagan, Greatest American Hero Ever.
But yes, Steve, after eight years of the Bush administration many Americans were downright delighted to find an articulate and charismatic leader who shared their ideas about the direction in which the country should move. A sizable majority of them, in fact.
Well, more than Newt Gingrich, sure. Nobody loves Newt Gingrich. That's like saying your favorite food is bark. But the idea that there are lots of liberals out there who worship Obama and would follow everything he says is a conservative creation. There really aren't. It's just something you guys tell yourselves, and you all agree, because you all tell yourselves.
There ARE a lot of liberals out there who worship Obama and would follow everythi8ng he says".
Just for clarification, do "African Americans" fall under the "liberal" umbrella?
PS Nobody cared about this until Heck started having a hissey fit about it. Two posts and no more interest. However, Heck, like xxxx, cannot handle dissenting views - even when he manufactures a conclusion.
I said "Congress", not, "Democrats".
Petty and sad, Heck.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login